Reactogenicity among health care workers following a BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 second dose after priming with a ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 vaccine
Copyright © 2022 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved..
OBJECTIVES: In March 2021, French authorities recommended a heterologous second dose of the mRNA vaccine for persons aged <55 years, with administration 9 to 12 weeks after the first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. This recommendation was despite a lack of data on the reactogenicity and safety of the regimen. Since then, several studies have shown an acceptable short-term safety profile of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 heterologous vaccination, although some transient increased reactogenicity has been described.
METHODS: We performed a single-centre prospective observational cohort study among health care workers (HCWs) at a tertiary care hospital to assess the reactogenicity of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines administered as a second dose in participants primed with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19.
RESULTS: Among 1184 HCWs, 356 (30%) agreed to participate. Of the participants, 32.3% were male, and the mean age was 35 years (standard deviation: 10.1 years). Of the participants, 229 received BNT162b2 and 127 received mRNA-1273. A systemic reaction was observed in 130 of 229 (56.8%) and 100 of 127 (78.7%) HCWs, respectively. Injection site reactions were generally limited (grade 1 or 2 in 163 of 229 (97.6%) and 90 of 127 (85.7 %) HCWs, respectively). After adjustment for age, sex, and HCW role, receiving the mRNA-1273 vaccine was associated with higher reactogenicity with more grade 3 side effects (adjusted OR (aOR): 3.34; 95% CI, 1.91-5.85), more systemic symptoms (aOR: 2.82; 95% CI, 1.69-4.7), and not being able to work (aOR: 8.35; 95% CI, 3.78-18.44) compared with receiving the BNT162b2 vaccine.
DISCUSSION: Among patients receiving the mRNA1273 vaccine as a second dose, our study confirms good tolerance of the heterologous schedule with a higher risk of short-term side effects in comparison with patients receiving the BNT162b2 vaccine.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2022 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2022 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:28 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases - 28(2022), 6 vom: 01. Juni, Seite 885.e1-885.e5 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Baldolli, Aurelie [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Completed 26.05.2022 Date Revised 27.05.2022 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.cmi.2022.02.010 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM337146055 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM337146055 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231225233739.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.cmi.2022.02.010 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1123.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM337146055 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)35182759 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S1198-743X(22)00083-0 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Baldolli, Aurelie |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Reactogenicity among health care workers following a BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 second dose after priming with a ChAdOx1 nCOV-19 vaccine |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Completed 26.05.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 27.05.2022 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2022 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. | ||
| 520 | |a OBJECTIVES: In March 2021, French authorities recommended a heterologous second dose of the mRNA vaccine for persons aged <55 years, with administration 9 to 12 weeks after the first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. This recommendation was despite a lack of data on the reactogenicity and safety of the regimen. Since then, several studies have shown an acceptable short-term safety profile of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 heterologous vaccination, although some transient increased reactogenicity has been described | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: We performed a single-centre prospective observational cohort study among health care workers (HCWs) at a tertiary care hospital to assess the reactogenicity of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines administered as a second dose in participants primed with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: Among 1184 HCWs, 356 (30%) agreed to participate. Of the participants, 32.3% were male, and the mean age was 35 years (standard deviation: 10.1 years). Of the participants, 229 received BNT162b2 and 127 received mRNA-1273. A systemic reaction was observed in 130 of 229 (56.8%) and 100 of 127 (78.7%) HCWs, respectively. Injection site reactions were generally limited (grade 1 or 2 in 163 of 229 (97.6%) and 90 of 127 (85.7 %) HCWs, respectively). After adjustment for age, sex, and HCW role, receiving the mRNA-1273 vaccine was associated with higher reactogenicity with more grade 3 side effects (adjusted OR (aOR): 3.34; 95% CI, 1.91-5.85), more systemic symptoms (aOR: 2.82; 95% CI, 1.69-4.7), and not being able to work (aOR: 8.35; 95% CI, 3.78-18.44) compared with receiving the BNT162b2 vaccine | ||
| 520 | |a DISCUSSION: Among patients receiving the mRNA1273 vaccine as a second dose, our study confirms good tolerance of the heterologous schedule with a higher risk of short-term side effects in comparison with patients receiving the BNT162b2 vaccine | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Observational Study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a COVID-19 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Immunization | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Pharmacovigilance | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Reactogenicity | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Vaccine | |
| 650 | 7 | |a COVID-19 Vaccines |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Vaccines, Synthetic |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a B5S3K2V0G8 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a EPK39PL4R4 |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a BNT162 Vaccine |2 NLM | |
| 650 | 7 | |a N38TVC63NU |2 NLM | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Fournier, Anna |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Verdon, Renaud |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Michon, Jocelyn |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases |d 1995 |g 28(2022), 6 vom: 01. Juni, Seite 885.e1-885.e5 |w (DE-627)NLM094580014 |x 1469-0691 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:28 |g year:2022 |g number:6 |g day:01 |g month:06 |g pages:885.e1-885.e5 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2022.02.010 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 28 |j 2022 |e 6 |b 01 |c 06 |h 885.e1-885.e5 | ||